Categories
Science Scientists Sweden

December 30, 2007 – Bert Bolin dies.

December 30, 2007 – Bert Bolin dies. He was a Swedish scientist, did more than anyone else (I would argue) from the 1950s to the 1980s to get carbon dioxide build-up on the political agenda (he was most certainly not alone in doing this – proper group effort). Find posts about him on this site here.

Bolin’s death was exquisitely well-timed. He had been the first chair of the IPCC, and that organisation had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize a couple of weeks earlier. The COP meeting of the UNFCCC in Bali had agreed – over US objections – a two year plan of negotiations for a big important/solve the post-Kyoto problem meeting to be held in Copenhagen in December 2009.

Bolin, I hope, died believing that, finally, at last, possibly too late, the rich nations were being successfully corralled into doing something serious on the issue he had been so responsible for.

Bolin’s book – A History of the Science and Politics of Climate Change: The Role of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change –  is fairly dry, but great if you’re a geek like me

Btw, at that time atmospheric CO2 was 384ppm. It’s roughly 418 now

Categories
Science Scientists Sweden

December 11, 1895 – Arrhenius reads his “Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air” paper to Swedish Academy of Science…

On this day, December 11 in 1895,  Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius read his would-eventually-be-’famous’ paper On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground  at the Swedish Academy of Science. 

It was published the following year

You can read it here – https://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf

For discussion, see

Hamblyn, R. 2009. The whistleblower and the canary: rhetorical constructions of climate change. Journal of Historical Geography, Vol. 35, pp.223-236

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 295ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

Why this matters

This has become the touchstone for “how long we’ve known” pieces.

What happened next

Arrhenius’ assumptions (and those whose work he drew on) were challenged by Angstrom et al.  The idea that a build up of carbon dioxide could cause warming was thrown in the dustbin, and – despite Guy Callendar – only really got pulled out in the 1950s…

Categories
Canada Science Scientists

December 10, 1978 – Academic workshop on “Climate/Society Interface” begins in Toronto…

On this day, December 10, 1978  a five day Workshop co-hosted by the CSU and SCOPE 

“Workshop on Climate/Society Interface” began in Toronto..

This was (presumably?!) a kind of sequel/follow up to the February 1978 IIASA workshop “Carbon Dioxide, Climate and Society” which had been cosponsored by WMO, UNEP, and SCOPE, February 21 – 24, 1978.

Papers included

Margolis, H. (December 1978) Estimating social impacts of climate change–What might be done versus what is likely to be done.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 335ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

Categories
International processes Science Scientists

November 17, 1980 – International meeting about carbon dioxide build up.

On this day in 1980 an international gathering of scientists took place in Villlach, Austria.

“The first major initiative to result from the establishment of the WCP was an international conference on climate change, held in Villach, Austria, from 17 to 22 November 1980. Under the chairmanship of Professor Bert Bolin of the University of Stockholm, the delegates issued a warning that the accumulation of greenhouse gases posed a great risk to the earth’s natural equilibria; they declared that the issue consequently had to be addressed with some urgency. Although their pronouncement drew some attention, its political impact was negligible.”

(Rowlands,1995: 71-2)  

 https://library.wmo.int/doc_num.php?explnum_id=3173

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 338.7ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

Why this matters

This is part of the long slow growth of awareness and concern

What happened next.
One of the attendees was Australian scientist Graeme Pearman. Later that year, in September 1980, the Australian Academy of Science held a symposium about carbon dioxide build-up in Canberra.

In 1985 another Villach meeting set the international ball properly rolling, thanks to US Senators paying close attention…

And the emissions? Oh, they kept climbing.  Of course they did. I mean, we didn’t stop burning the fossil fuels, did we?

Categories
Science Scientists Sweden

November 15, 1958 – Academic Paper on “Changes in Carbon Dioxide Content of Atmosphere and Sea Due to Fossil Fuel Combustion” submitted

On this day, November 15, in 1958 one of the first papers about, well, our current problem, was submitted for publication.

1958 Bolin and Eriksson’s classic paper         “Changes in the Carbon Dioxide Content of the Atmosphere and Sea Due to Fossil Fuel Combustion” submitted.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 315ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

Through the 1950s, American and Swedish scientists (and others) were looking at carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and saying to themselves “now that’s interesting.”

Why this matters. 

We knew

What happened next?

Bolin? It became Bolin’s life work.  He shepherded the climate science agenda forward with skill and patience for decades. He was a key player all through the 1970s and 1980s. First chair of the IPCC.  Thank goodness for him he died when he did, before the farce of Copenhagen and so on.

Categories
Science Scientists United States of America

November 1, 1975 – Stephen Schneider tries to clear up the “Carbon Dioxide Climate Confusion.”

On this day, November 1 in 1975, climate scientist Stephen Schneider tried to keep folks eyes on the prize, given how many various books and hypotheses were already being thrown around

On the Carbon Dioxide–Climate Confusion  Stephen H. Schneider J. Atmos. Sci. (1975) 32 (11): 2060–2066.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 331ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

By the mid 1970s, a cottage industry had grown up around “weird weather.”

Why this matters. 

We need to remember that there were claims and counter-claims, some outlandish

What happened next?

By the late 70s it was pretty damn clear that it was a carbon dioxide problem…

Categories
Science Scientists

October 26, 1975 – “The Endangered Atmosphere” conference begins…

On this day, October 26, 1975 the “Endangered Atmosphere” conference begins in…

It was co-organised by Stephen Schneider and Margaret Mead. 

To quote from the preface of “The Atmosphere: Endangered and Endangering” book that followed – 

“When Dr. Margaret Mead was a Visiting Scholar at the Fogarty  International Center, one of her interests focused on the interactions  between the world society and its planetary environment. She saw a  conflict developing, and yet there was surprisingly little public awareness  of the growing problems and few efforts to develop long-term national  and international solutions to these problems. She therefore persuaded the Fogarty International Center to sponsor a conference on the  atmospheric environment which would explore the ways to maintain it  as a healthy place in which to live. 

An organizing committee planned the Conference, and its members are listed in these Proceedings. We were fortunate in being able to enlist the help of Dr. William W. Kellogg, of the National Center for  Atmospheric Research, to work with Dr. Mead as co-organizer and co-editor of the Proceedings; he is known internationally for his work on  climate change and mankind’s influence on climate. Four able and  dedicated rapporteurs were also enlisted, and this report owes its existence largely to their efforts. They are Mr. Anthony Broderick, Doctors Richard S. Greeley and J. Dana Thompson, and Ms. Barbara West

1975  26-29 “Endangered Atmosphere” conference

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 328.36ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – more and more climate scientists, agronomists, anthropologists etc were getting interested in what would happen if (when) temperatures started to go up.

Mead had known about carbon dioxide build-up as early as 1964 (and probably earlier) – she had been on the atmosphere group of the President’s Science Advisory Committee with Roger Revelle.

Why this matters. 

Good people have been thinking about this for almost fifty years. And here we are…

What happened next?

In 2007 the denialists got hold of it. A terrible article – held up as an exemplar of good practice by the denialists, of course – was published. It’s all Rockefeller’s fault…

Categories
Science Scientists United States of America

October 24, 1967 – editor of Science warns about C02 build-up

On this day, October 24  in 1967, folks at a Public Health conference in Miami Beach… got to hear a warning about climate change, from Philip Abelson Abelson was a big fish, the editor of Science. His list of man-made environmental threats was mostly “local” stuff- DDT, smog etc. But then there is this.

“Each year, tons of carbon dioxide are released into the atmosphere and the amount is increasing. As a result, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is growing. By the year 2000, an increase of 25 per cent is probable.(7) Such a change would not have much direct effect on human beings, but it might have substantial indirect effects. Many geophysicists believe that such an increase would affect the world’s temperature by what is called a greenhouse effect. The extra carbon dioxide would slow heat loss from the earth, resulting in warmer climates and possibly the melting of polar ice. “

Abelson paper was presented before a Special Session of the American Public Health Association at the Ninety-Fifth Annual Meeting in Miami Beach, Fla., October 24, 1967.  https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdfplus/10.2105/AJPH.58.11.2043

(7)  Restoring the Quality of Our Environment. Report of the Environmental Pollution Panel. President’s Advisory Committee. Washington, D. C.: The White House (Nov.), 1965, p. 120. 

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 319.39ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

People were beginning to clock to all the different ways we were screwing ourselves. Abelson’s speech was a summary of the state of the art, and included the Revelle warning in the PSAC publication of two years previously.

Why this matters. 

It is via events like this that news percolated out…

What happened next?

By late 1968, various scientific work was more seriously underway, and led to the crucial July 1970 Study of Man’s Influence on Climate workshop in Williamstown, Massachusetts.

Categories
Science Scientists United Nations

October 23, 1963 – JKF warns of actions “which can irreversibly alter our biological and physical environment on a global scale.” 

On this day, October 23 in 1963, President John F Kennedy gave a speech about what we now might call production science and impact science https://era.org.au/capitalism-and-production-science-vs-impact-science/ – 

At an event commemorating the 100th anniversary of the country’s most esteemed scientific body, the National Academy of Sciences, [Kennedy] also conveyed a warning about America’s responsibility to control the effects of scientific study: “For, as science investigates the natural environment, it also modifies it – and that modification may have incalculable consequences, for evil as well as for good. [S]cience today has the power for the first time in history to undertake experiments with premeditation which can irreversibly alter our biological and physical  environment on a global scale.” Kennedy chided the scientists, saying that every time they came up with a  major invention, politicians had to invent new institutions to cope with them.

(Hamblin, 2013: 147)

 

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 315.99ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

The previous year, Kennedy had read Silent Spring, and been through the Cuban Missile Crisis. Both spoke to armageddon (slow and fast). The partial test ban treaty, banning atmospheric explosions of nuclear weapons had, two weeks earlier, become A Thing. – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial_Nuclear_Test_Ban_Treaty

Why this matters. 

Had Kennedy not gone to Dallas, maybe things would have been different? Or maybe not! Lunchtime counter-factuals, eh…

What happened next?

Kennedy went to Dallas.

Categories
Science Scientists United States of America

October 18, 1973 – “how on earth do you stop using fossil fuels?”

On this day, October 18 in 1973, a prominent US climate scientist, Reid Bryson, testified before a subcommittee of US congress.

Reid Bryson – There is no way right now that we can control the climate to make it more benign. Even if we were to say “let us stop using fossil fuels so that we do not add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, because that impacts the world climate,” how on earth could you stop using fossil fuels? Even those countries that are most heavily impacted by the climatic change are the ones who say it is our turn to be affluent and it is in the use of fossil fuels that one gains affluence. U.S. Congress (October 18, 1973). U.S. and world food situation. Hearings, before the Subcommittee on Agricultural Production, Marketing, and Stabilization of Prices and Subcommittee on Foreign Agricultural Policy of the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, United States Senate, Ninety-third Congress, first session. U.S. G.P.O. p. 120.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 327.18ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this –  politicians, sensitised by Earth Day and various reports, were beginning to look into the security/geopolitical impacts of a change in the climate (hot or cold).  Food security was a Big Issue.

Why this matters. 

Well, ultimately it doesn’t, but it’s kinda interesting!

What happened next?

Bryson bet all his chips on “not fossil fuels,” and lost. There’s an interesting article about that and him, here,